Laserfiche WebLink
CASE # 44683 – HOYT,JOHN D <br />TMK 5-3-008-010-0000 <br /> <br />The appellant, John Hoyt, was present. Present for the County was appraiser, Hoku Manning. <br /> <br />The parcel is a vacant undeveloped .557 acre parcel of land on the makai side of Akoni Pule <br />Highway, in the Halawa Ahupua’a. <br /> <br />The land value is under appeal. Appellant purchased the property in 2019 for $150,000. <br /> <br />The appellant(s) presented their case. The County presented their case and recommended to <br />sustain the land value of $222,500. A call for questions was made. <br /> <br />Mr. Tokuuke moved to sustain the county’s assessed value of $222,500 as the appellant <br />did not prove the value of the assessed value of the property exceeds by more than 20% <br />the ratio of assessment to market value. A call for discussion was made. Motion passed <br />by a vote of 3:1 with Mr. Okumoto being the nay vote. <br /> <br /> <br />CASE #44682 – WOODLEY,ROBIN MAUREEN <br />TMK 5-4-007-074-0000 <br /> <br />While the case was being called, Mr. Hoyt withdrew his appeal stating this is a waste of his time. <br />If you are only looking at the market rate then this is a sham and I withdraw my appeal. You are <br />having a very negative impact on our community. He apologized but is frustrated. <br /> <br />Mr. Harano called for a 5 minute recess at 10:31 a.m. while Corporation Counsel Sinclair spoke <br />with the appellant outside. <br /> <br />Mr. Harano reconvened the hearing ending recess at 10:38 a.m. <br /> <br />Mr. Harano made a motion to accept Mr. Hoyt’s withdraw of the appeal and return the $50 <br />appeal fee. Motion passes with a vote of 3 ayes, Ms. Blancett-Maddock abstained. Mr. <br />Tokuuke seconded the motion after the fact. <br /> <br /> <br />CASE #44598 – LANGAN,CHRISTOPHER L <br />TMK 5-9-012-029-0000 <br /> <br />The appellant, Mr. Langan was present. Present for the County was appraiser, Hoku Manning. <br /> <br />The parcel is a 3.327 acre vacant property in Kohala Ranch, a gated community. <br /> <br />The land value is under appeal. <br /> <br />The appellant presented his case stating use is bee apiary. The County presented their case <br />and recommended to sustain the land value of $264,000. The owner did not apply for the <br />agricultural use program. A call for questions was made. <br /> <br />Ms. Blancett-Maddock motioned to sustain the county assessment at $264,100 for the <br />land due to the appellant did not prove that the assessed value of the property was more <br /> <br />